The role of patient surgical positioning on hip arthroplasty component placement and clinical outcomes: a systematic re-view and meta-analysis.

IF 1.4 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS Orthopedic Reviews Pub Date : 2023-04-11 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.52965/001c.74116
Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Biagio Zampogna, Erika Albo, Guglielmo Torre, Eleonora Villari, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro
{"title":"The role of patient surgical positioning on hip arthroplasty component placement and clinical outcomes: a systematic re-view and meta-analysis.","authors":"Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Biagio Zampogna, Erika Albo, Guglielmo Torre, Eleonora Villari, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro","doi":"10.52965/001c.74116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) may be performed through various approaches; however, depending on the surgical position of the patient, the superiority of lateral or supine position is still debated. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the supine versus lateral position in THA in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and component placement. The systematic literature search was performed by the use of Cochrane Central, Pub-Med-Medline, and Google Scholar in order to select studies that evaluated clinical outcomes and the outliers of cup alignment for inclination and anteversion between supine and lateral position for hip arthroplasty. Finally, 9 articles were included in this review. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the two groups for clinical outcomes, unless for blood loss and VAS (respectively p = 0.05 and p = 0.004 in favour of lateral decubitus). Regarding the number of outliers, the supine decubitus showed significant differences only for the cup anteversion (p = 0.01). However, more prospective studies with a longer follow-up that analyze both clinical and radiological parameters are needed to assess the superiority of supine or lateral patient position for total hip arthroplasty.</p>","PeriodicalId":19669,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Reviews","volume":"15 ","pages":"74116"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10097590/pdf/orthopedicreviews_2023_15_74116.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.74116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) may be performed through various approaches; however, depending on the surgical position of the patient, the superiority of lateral or supine position is still debated. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the supine versus lateral position in THA in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and component placement. The systematic literature search was performed by the use of Cochrane Central, Pub-Med-Medline, and Google Scholar in order to select studies that evaluated clinical outcomes and the outliers of cup alignment for inclination and anteversion between supine and lateral position for hip arthroplasty. Finally, 9 articles were included in this review. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the two groups for clinical outcomes, unless for blood loss and VAS (respectively p = 0.05 and p = 0.004 in favour of lateral decubitus). Regarding the number of outliers, the supine decubitus showed significant differences only for the cup anteversion (p = 0.01). However, more prospective studies with a longer follow-up that analyze both clinical and radiological parameters are needed to assess the superiority of supine or lateral patient position for total hip arthroplasty.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
患者手术定位对髋关节置换术组件置入和临床效果的影响:系统性再观察和荟萃分析。
全髋关节置换术(THA)可通过多种方法进行;然而,根据患者的手术体位,侧卧位或仰卧位的优劣仍存在争议。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是比较仰卧位与侧卧位在髋关节置换术中的术中、术后疗效和组件置放方面的差异。我们使用 Cochrane Central、Pub-Med-Medline 和 Google Scholar 进行了系统性文献检索,以筛选出评估临床疗效以及髋关节置换术中仰卧位和侧卧位髋臼杯倾斜和前翻对位异常值的研究。最后,9 篇文章被纳入本综述。荟萃分析表明,除失血量和VAS外,两组临床结果无显著差异(侧卧位的P = 0.05和P = 0.004分别为0.05和0.004)。关于异常值的数量,仰卧位仅在髋臼杯前倾方面存在显著差异(p = 0.01)。然而,要评估全髋关节置换术中患者仰卧位或侧卧位的优越性,还需要进行更多的前瞻性研究,对临床和放射学参数进行更长时间的随访分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Orthopedic Reviews
Orthopedic Reviews ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
122
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Reviews is an Open Access, online-only, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles concerned with any aspect of orthopedics, as well as diagnosis and treatment, trauma, surgical procedures, arthroscopy, sports medicine, rehabilitation, pediatric and geriatric orthopedics. All bone-related molecular and cell biology, genetics, pathophysiology and epidemiology papers are also welcome. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, reviews and case reports of general interest.
期刊最新文献
Haemodynamics, side effects and safety of the combination of continuous femoral nerve block and intravenous parecoxib for pain management after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A pilot study. Practice Patterns of Physicians who Perform Caudal Epidural Steroid Injections. Lateral ligament reconstruction and additive medial ligament reconstruction in chronic ankle instability: a retrospective study. Anesthetic Management of a Patient with Renal Cell Carcinoma-Associated Venous Thrombosis and Massive Transfusion. Comparative assessment of bone cement implantation syndrome in cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty: impact in patients with and without preexisting heart disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1